Oh, I see.

Yeah, but Todd Howard or whatever his name is said that the Switch demo was the most impressive hardware demo he's ever seen. Especially since the demo was indeed the remaster, which couldn't run on Wii U - level hardware. I dunno. It just feels like there must be more to this.

Yes, but will it have fun games to play? That's all I care about.

Yes, the Pixel C is throtteling almost 50% if it is under stress more than a few minutes: https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx40&os=Android&api=gl&cpu-arch=ARM&hwtype=GPU&hwname=NVIDIA(R)%20Tegra(R)%20X1&did=28156617&D=Google%20Pixel%20C

Manhattan 3.1 Benchmark first run = 19.9 fps, long-term performance = 10.7 fps

T-Rex 2.0 Benchmark first run = 58.1 fps, long-term performance = 36.4 fps

The more I look at it, the more this transition really feels like GC to Wii.

The wii was what? 2 Gamecubes taped together with new gimmick priced at around $250 with a Zelda game on both?

The Switch looks to be 2 wiiU's taped together with a new gimmick priced at around $250 with a Zelda game on both?

Now obviously, different arch, portable vs motion controls and etc but eerily similar. The question really will be, is being a portable really enough to sell like how the wii did? Specially on how the times and circumstances have changed such as launching during the mid cycle of the other consoles and mobile competition.

2017 will be an interesting year for sure.

Welp that explains a lot, lol. The issue here is not just "performance" sure it's great your chip can hit a performance peak, but for portable devices, the problem is they cannot run at peak performance for very long. Not without destroying battery life and/or overheating. 

The full clocked Maxwell Tegra X1 consumes 10 watts at peak, which is still waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too hot for a portable machine, keep in mind the LCD screen, CPU, RAM, WiFI antenna all need electricity on top of that also. 

If true, then i guess its' a bit of a shock.  It's like when you think Nintendo's finally on the right track then..bam! something is off lol

But reality this doesn't bother me as long as it still brings in fun games. I loved my PSP Go simply for the function of being portable and able to hook up to TV. So the fact that the Switch can do the same is enough of a reason for me to purchase it.

If the Switch gets multiplats, yes. If the Switch doesn't, then there's literally no frame of reference, so I don't see how.

That's the thing about it being portable. The only reason portability is valuable is if you can play your normal games with added flexability. Portability has no value as a mass market product if everything on it is exclusive, because everything not on it is "exclusive" to everyone else. Portability becomes valuably only when multiplats are there as a frame of reference.

I can play Call of Duty glued to my TV on PS4/XBO/PC, or I can play it any way I want on Switch. I can play GTA glued to my TV on PS4/XBO/PC, or I can play it any way I want on Switch. I can play Destiny glued to my TV on PS4/XBO/PC, or I can play it any way I want on Switch. If Switch loses that, it almost completely loses it's value proposition.

Is this thing more powerful, less powerful or pretty much equal to the Wii U?

Still a rumor non the less. If this thing is equal/barely more powerful than the Wii U, then why would bethesda be interested in it when they bashed the Wii U? Also, what about Nvidias comments (ya know the people who actually make the innards of this device?) when they stated that the chips are based on their top chips, plus the fact that everyone keeps saying that this is just a slightly tweaked tegra, when they also stated that the chips are custom built from the ground up for the switch, and they have stated that they have put over 500 man years is research and engineering the chips?

Maybe. I guess we'll see.